Meghan Markle and Prince Harry News and Updates Part 2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find this interesting:

"I guess the highlight for me is sticking him on the back of a bicycle in his little baby seat and taking him on bike rides which is something I was never able to do when I was young" - Prince Harry





And this...

He certainly does have his own history, doesn't he?

Lol this is clearly a photo op

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know how this stuff works but can someone explain how the BRF can just deny support for Harry's child when they're literally protecting williams kids?

"Do what we want and how we want it or you are on your own."

Not really true.

There’s no precedent for giving a prince title to Archie, or separate security. He’s a great-grandchild. The Queen would have to issue a separate letters patent, which Parliament would then have to approve.

People act like Williams’ and Harry’s kids are on equal footing. They are not and never will be.

Got it thanks. Meghan made it seem like her son was stripped of the title. Said something along the lines of why should my son not have what he is entitled to have...That's why I was confused.

That's not quite it. William's kids already have it because they are children of the heir. Since the time of Elizabeth's father, Archie would get it when his grandfather became king. Right now the monarch is his great grandmother. The BRF was considering changing that tradition so that grandchildren on the reigning monarch NOT get the title. Meghan was pointing out that they were making that change just when Archie and his sister were going to be the ones to benefit. It troubled her that they would change the tradition just when the first person of color would stand to benefit. It troubled her far more that ongoing security for Archie and his sister was tied to that title. So it wasn't just a title. It was a title and security.

That’s been in the works long before Meghan entered the picture, she has a tendency of centering herself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the people saying Oprah didn't buy it haven't watched a lot of Oprah. When she is skeptical, you really know it. Oprah believes Meghan.

Yeah, Oprah said she believed them this morning on CBS. The entire morning show was very sympathetic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know how this stuff works but can someone explain how the BRF can just deny support for Harry's child when they're literally protecting williams kids?

"Do what we want and how we want it or you are on your own."

“And don’t become too popular. Even if you do everything we say, but the public likes you, we’ll find a way to make you pay”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oprah just helped them launch the brand. Pretty sure she is all in.

Don't forget that Oprah attended their wedding when they barely knew each other. She has since socialized with Meghan's mother. She was not an impartial interviewer.

THis was to help them and their future endeavours. I don't see that it pretended to be anything else.

They had a photoshoot ready to go. Nice pic. https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-moms/news/pregnant-meghan-markle-holds-son-archie-new-baby-bump-pic/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know how this stuff works but can someone explain how the BRF can just deny support for Harry's child when they're literally protecting williams kids?

"Do what we want and how we want it or you are on your own."

+1 you are either in or you are out. They wanted to step out halfway. Not possible. As Harry admitted in the interview m, there was a change of their status.

ok. they thy decided to step all the way out. who wouldn't?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know how this stuff works but can someone explain how the BRF can just deny support for Harry's child when they're literally protecting williams kids?

"Do what we want and how we want it or you are on your own."

Not really true.

There’s no precedent for giving a prince title to Archie, or separate security. He’s a great-grandchild. The Queen would have to issue a separate letters patent, which Parliament would then have to approve.

People act like Williams’ and Harry’s kids are on equal footing. They are not and never will be.

Got it thanks. Meghan made it seem like her son was stripped of the title. Said something along the lines of why should my son not have what he is entitled to have...That's why I was confused.

That's not quite it. William's kids already have it because they are children of the heir. Since the time of Elizabeth's father, Archie would get it when his grandfather became king. Right now the monarch is his great grandmother. The BRF was considering changing that tradition so that grandchildren on the reigning monarch NOT get the title. Meghan was pointing out that they were making that change just when Archie and his sister were going to be the ones to benefit. It troubled her that they would change the tradition just when the first person of color would stand to benefit. It troubled her far more that ongoing security for Archie and his sister was tied to that title. So it wasn't just a title. It was a title and security.

That is not true. The law was changed in 2013 just before George was born. Otherwise his siblings would NOT have been HRHs but he would have. They would have been Lord Louis and Lady Charlotte until Charles was King - just like Archie. Meghan's confusion was 'well if they changed the law for one child, while aren't they doing it for the rest'.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Honestly my impression was that Kate was thrashed far more than Meghan. Kate did what was expected of her and ultimately earned some respect, but it did take a very long time. That's how it works. Meghan wasn't willing to play that game, and although I don't blame her for that, at some point she needs to sit down and acknowledge the unbelievable privilege of having a husband with a trust fund that allows you to do whatever you please. I mean seriously, go enjoy the private life in your mansion you say you wanted and stop with the attention-seeking behavior.

I don't think you were paying attention, then.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ellievhall/meghan-markle-kate-middleton-double-standards-royal

How long was Kate part of the family before she got pregnant? Exactly. She endured years of press abuse when they were dating and then the first few years of their marriage before she got pregnant. MM didn’t even make it a year.

The only thing said about Kate was Waitey Katey and she was the granddaughter of a coal miner, and daughter of a stewardess. OUCH!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the people saying Oprah didn't buy it haven't watched a lot of Oprah. When she is skeptical, you really know it. Oprah believes Meghan.

Yeah, Oprah said she believed them this morning on CBS. The entire morning show was very sympathetic.

Yep. These people clearly haven't seen the Oprah 'did you season the chicken?' episode.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My dear dcumers, you are so totally naive and blind.
Here is what is happening here, and it is plain and simple.

Harry blames the RBF for his mother's death, and before that, he blames them for how it was handled. He blames his dad and his grandma for all of it.
And they are to blame!
He is out for revenge, and he is taking them down.
You know the same way most of the dcum cuts off their parents and families cause they are toxic? Stop being hypocrites here; BRF is toxic; if they were your family, you would cut them off.
Also, it seems that Harry is not a spineless twit, regardless of what he might sound like. He is out for blood and blood he is getting. Why should he and Meghan take it quietly and be a good sport about it? Think about it, they crucified his mother, and for what? For wanting to have a real marriage and not turning a blind eye? Watch the documentary on Disney+, in her own words. What was done to Diana is nothing short of criminal behavior.
I, for one, am proud of him.

Diana died because she got in a car with a drunk driver and chose not to wear a seatbelt.

If she had remained under royal protection, she would never have got in that car.

If she had common sense she wouldn't have gotten into that car.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I truly think the best thing the royal family can do is ignore the interview and anything else that comes from those two.

Maybe. But personally I’d like to see more juicy gossip leaked because I could care less about the royals nor entitled people crying about titles that mean nothing. It’s sick but fun entertainment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Americans love grifters apparently. First Trump now Markle.
SAD!

Americans support non-racists. And PM Johnson needs to think carefully about what he's going to say this afternoon. Thanks to him Britain needs that post-Brexit/I'm-so-racist-I'm-leaving-the-EU-over-migrants deal more than we need anything from them.

And Jen Psaki, the Biden Press Secretary just spoke up in support from the WHITE HOUSE PRESS ROOM.

Take that you British racists.

Psaki didn’t take a side, only that she supports people telling their story. Typical Biden diplomacy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know how this stuff works but can someone explain how the BRF can just deny support for Harry's child when they're literally protecting williams kids?

"Do what we want and how we want it or you are on your own."

Not really true.

There’s no precedent for giving a prince title to Archie, or separate security. He’s a great-grandchild. The Queen would have to issue a separate letters patent, which Parliament would then have to approve.

People act like Williams’ and Harry’s kids are on equal footing. They are not and never will be.

This. And I'm not surprised Megan was not on board with this. She's not the second fiddle type.

Nailed it.

Yes, she did not like her place in the hierarchy. And, let's face it, she brought a lot of glamour and some modernity to the family and expected to be treated like the asset she was. But that's not how it works in the BRF. They didn't know how to work with Diana and they didn't know how to work with her, even more complicated since a mature American who did not come from or really understand their world.

[Anonymous]

Will Harry ever visit with his family again

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know how this stuff works but can someone explain how the BRF can just deny support for Harry's child when they're literally protecting williams kids?

"Do what we want and how we want it or you are on your own."

Not really true.

There’s no precedent for giving a prince title to Archie, or separate security. He’s a great-grandchild. The Queen would have to issue a separate letters patent, which Parliament would then have to approve.

People act like Williams’ and Harry’s kids are on equal footing. They are not and never will be.

Got it thanks. Meghan made it seem like her son was stripped of the title. Said something along the lines of why should my son not have what he is entitled to have...That's why I was confused.

That's not quite it. William's kids already have it because they are children of the heir. Since the time of Elizabeth's father, Archie would get it when his grandfather became king. Right now the monarch is his great grandmother. The BRF was considering changing that tradition so that grandchildren on the reigning monarch NOT get the title. Meghan was pointing out that they were making that change just when Archie and his sister were going to be the ones to benefit. It troubled her that they would change the tradition just when the first person of color would stand to benefit. It troubled her far more that ongoing security for Archie and his sister was tied to that title. So it wasn't just a title. It was a title and security.

That’s been in the works long before Meghan entered the picture, she has a tendency of centering herself.

Yes, she was defending her son. I’d be livid too if I were her.
Feeding her to the wolves aka tabloids and leaving her son defenseless. Who need this family, royal or not.